in the Senate, but in the smaller counties,
where they have less than one vote, the
delegate would be an individual, but his
weight in voting power would be equal to
the percentage that his county has toward
the proper total representation. This means
that in a county, and I over-simplify it,
the delegate for that county would only be
entitled to half a vote, and from the ad-
joining county, and again I simplify it, he
would only be entitled to half a vote; that
each of the two individuals, and they
would be bodies, that is two- people, would
then have the right to vote, in the General
Assembly but each would have half a vote.
I must say, this is a novel situation. I
do add that the manner in which this is
being presented to you is novel also, but I
do not think that we ought to shy away, or
be scared of anything that is new.
1 myself have views with respect to this
proposal but I have presented it to you so
that you may debate it, discuss it and vote
on it. I think the smaller counties have
their opportunity now to present their case
to this assemblage for its decision.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition?
Delegate Scanlan?
DELEGATE SCANLAN: I have a ques-
tion. I will address it either to the natural
father or the adopted father.
THE CHAIRMAN: I do not think your
question is in order at this time. I will
permit you to ask the question when some-
one in favor has the floor.
Delegate Clark.
DELEGATE J. CLARK: Has there been
a second to that motion?
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, there has.
DELEGATE J. CLARK: I would like to
offer an amendment to the motion, Mr.
Chairman.
I would like to amend the amendment to
make it revert to what it was before it
was corrected.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I second.
THE CHAIRMAN: Just a second. I am
not sure that I understand. You mean to
leave it as the language was typed?
DELEGATE J. CLARK: Yes, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: I assume your
amendment is not written, Senator Clark,
or is it? |
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, sir,
it is exactly as you have it.
THE CHAIRMAN: What I was about
to say is that if you interpose the objec-
tion to the correction, the amendment
would go back to its original form.
DELEGATE J. CLARK: That is right,
yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Sherbow?
DELEGATE SHERBOW: I think in
view of the objection and the rule that all
amendments must be printed, we will have
to have the amendment in the form origi-
nally typed, unless either the rules are sus-
pended to permit consideration of an
amendment not written, or unless you have
a written amendment to make the change
you want.
DELEGATE J. CLARK: Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Clark.
DELEGATE J. CLARK: I do not ob-
ject.
I would prefer to proceed and vote on my
proposal first.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: I would like
to make this inquiry of the Chair. Is not
the amendment proposed by the delegate
from Howard-County out of order, in view
of the fact that there has just been a
vote with respect to the number?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Beg par-
don, sir, it was 36 and 108, not 35-108.
THE CHAIRMAN: There was no vote
on these numbers. There was a vote on
numbers, but the section has not been
adopted as such. In other words, that is
merely the adoption of an amendment to
this section.
Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: As I under-
stand it, this Committee of the Whole just
a few moments ago adopted an amendment
which said that the number of members of
each house shall be as prescribed by law,
the votes in the House of Delegates in
effect shall not exceed 120, and the num-
ber of members of the Senate shall not ex-
ceed one-third thereof.
THE CHAIRMAN: That is correct, but
this amendment, if it were in its original
form, could change that rule in view of the
fact that it is also tied in with other |
